Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

A War of Fear, Aggression and Evolution

Powerful Essays
2275 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
A War of Fear, Aggression and Evolution
A War of Fear, Aggression and Evolution
There are endless accounts of the Great War. Different views from various angles of thought. Although it seems universal that most historians agree all the participants in Europe at the time expected a short war. Tensions were rising everywhere. Public statements from Empires relating to others as well as prior conflicts had already taken a toll on most nations’ collective psyche in Europe. This greatly affected how they would plan their future strategies in foreign policy, as well as war entry. The key theme among most of the region was that the eminent war would be necessary and swift. Winston Churchill was quoted as saying the fight would be a “cleansing thunderstorm” short and quick. How wrong he was. Having read Herwig’s work I find it to be obvious that Germany acted in aggression in the year 1914, as well as in the year’s preceding the start of the First World War, specifically Emperor Wilhelm II whose words from the War Counsel of 1912 were full of fire and brimstone towards Britain. What was not as explicitly pointed out, and seemed apparent, was the increasing dissolution or extinction of old world empires. I believe this evolution in Europe had much to do with the once powerful Habsburg Monarchy, who became the Austrian Hungry Empire, as well as the German Empire, both of whom didn’t realize they were breathing their last gasps of real breath. I contend that WWI was born of fear as much as aggression. Much like an aging boxer taking one last shot, hoping to regain the belt, but the new generation of fighter has already passed him by.
In 1912 Germany’s uncertainties were many. They feared the growing power of Russia. They also had the expectation of their Northern neighbor becoming an enemy who would not simply equal them, but likely pass Germany in military prowess within the next few years. Additionally it is clear that Germany, Britain, France and Italy were all suffering from bureaucratic warfare within their own boarders. This threatened to evolve into revolt, even civil war. This war was looked at as an opportunity to deviate the political infighting, and unite nations against a common foe. Germany was home to one gentleman specifically who had political aspirations and war wasn’t initially one of them. Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg. Hollweg was a typical politician in that he played both sides as best as possible. Wolfgang J Mommsen writes that Hollweg was against war, but the conservatives as well as some of the public felt war would be good for national character. The German General Staff also challenged Hollweg’s foreign politics. They believed that there should be war while they were in a position to win it.1 Holleweg quickly realized that if events didn’t play out the way he hoped, and the General Staff was proved to be correct in their preventative plans, Hollweg’s political career would be ruined. Due to this pressure being applied Hollweg backed off; he didn’t want to look weak politically. Although preventative war wasn’t his first goal, he saw that war was upon them, so like any good politician he played ball. Switching his philosophy to manipulating the European view on why war would begin. He argued that relations with Britain were improving and if there was war the Russians should be the ones to provoke it. Hollweg didn’t believe Russia would strike, but he needed to covertly force their hand so as to not alienate the Brits, and European sympathy. So according to this logic Germany as a whole wasn’t looking necessarily looking to dominate the world, rather maintain their worth as a power, and specific individuals such as Hollweg looked to preserve their political clout. This was a sign of fear, confusion and incompetent leadership that lacked a clear unified objective.2 Hollweg should have realized this story was already written. Going back to the War Counsel in 1912, John Rohl wrote that the German Kaiser Wilhelm II became incensed when he learned of the British openly stating England could not and would not stand by and allow Germany to become the premier power in Europe. This was looked at in the Kaiser’s opinion as full reason to act militarily against all enemies. He wanted to direct Austria against Serbia and prepare for war against England. Wilhelm was convinced to delay the fight, but this was only temporary.3
I would like to point out that Germany struggled to compete in the world economy without taking more territory. This was an old world problem, and yet another reason the Empires were in jeopardy of becoming extinct. Capitalism was the way of the future. The old monarchies could be ruined by a poor leader due to only one person making decisions; this leaves little room for error, whereas in capitalism a leader is impactful, but can be overcome if he isn’t competent.
There is little denying that Chancellor Hollweg feared the Russians, as well as Germany’s potential downfall in Europe either militarily of economically. Kurt Riezler a trusted advisor of the Chancellor feared the weakness he correctly sensed in in Austria. Austria did war with the Balkan nation East of their border, Serbia. But they were reluctant to invoke Russian’s fury. Germany was in a tough situation. Whether they were exposed for pushing Austria into war, of if they did not support Austria’s bloodlust for Serbia and consequential attack of them, Germany was to look poorly no matter what happened. If they coerced Austria to attack they would likely earn the aggression of the Triple Entente. Now on the other hand, not aiding their last reliable ally could push Austria Hungry into the arms of Europe and doom Germany’s place in Europe. Again distress is the underliner.4 My argument here is that Germany was constantly fearful of every action, and therefore clouded in their judgment, and it wasn’t all fear of losing power. In reading outtakes from Riezler’s journal it seems there was an underling of dread throughout the Country. This brings about a light of sympathy for Germany. Instead of the evil empire plotting world domination, there is a sense of desperation to keep Germany’s sovereignty in their realm. Going further into the psyche of Germany, Wolfgang Kruse wrote about the supposed war euphoria taking place during the year of 1914. He argued that the “euphoria” was more excitement for the limited news that was available to the Volk. This was a world with no TV’s or radio; printed media was all they had. Mobs of people would wait eagerly on the arriving news, leading to large crowds that may have seemed excited but were simply anxious for news of the impending war. This can explain the supposed excitement in the large crowds. After the war there was a real effort in Germany to write the history they deemed suitable, but the reality is, the masses didn’t find the war glorious or exciting, especially the proletariat who sent their fathers and sons off to die while there was food shortages and lack of work at home.5 There wasn’t war euphoria, there was dread and nervous wait for news.
Germany wasn’t the only Empire acting in fear. England, when realizing the ability and prowess of Germany began a policy of encirclement to contain the Germans from becoming to dominate. The Royal Navy was threatened greatly by Germanys Fleet. Because of this, treaties were made with Japan, France and Russia in the early 1900’s. Moving on to France, they were no longer a powerhouse and relied on their alliance with Russia and England to stay in the game. Then there was the bear in the North. Russia had reason to fear Austria Hungry. The continued territorial claims by the former Hapsburg Empire threatened Russia’s ally Serbia directly, but the threat to Russia was more specifically the German Empire who allied with Austria Hungry. Again fear played a part in the actions of this time period. In my opinion there is no doubt Russia out of fear had a part in the assassination Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. Maybe not directly, but they at least had an indirect part. It’s hard to believe that Serbia would have been so brazen as to kill the heir to the Austrian throne if they didn’t count on Russia’s support. Maybe this was a conspiracy or maybe it was simply the work of five Serbs and two Russians. Either way fear of the Austrian Empire led to this event. Of course the official word is that Serbian Nationalists killed the Arch Duke and the event was not an official attack by the nation of Serbia let alone Russia. I contend that it seems likely there was some sort of conspiracy. The biggest fear I believe Austria had was losing control of the Baltic region, and the amount of influence Russia would have in that happening. I would dare to say Austria was arrogant, ignorant and fearful. Arrogant because they failed to accept the growing capitalistic tendencies of the world and ignored the effect it would have on them. They seemed ignorant to the ever changing social norms in the world. As communication became better, and as trade expeditions continued, different cultures influenced the proletariat in most empires. Citizens began wanting better lives; more control in their daily affairs, and more of a representative government, even if they didn’t fully understand what that entailed. The Dual Monarchy in Austria Hungry was holding on to old world philosophies that without WWI I believe there would have been violent revolt. Proof of this argument lies in the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand. This was also evident in Russia, and even in Great Britain.
The general consensus that this war would be quick also helped led to the fall of a couple old Empires. With no-one preparing for a long fight, economies and industrial bases were depleted. Alfred von Schieffen was quoted in saying “in an age in which the existence of nations is based on the uninterrupted progress of trade and commerce, a strategy of exhaustion is impossible when the maintenance of millions necessitates the expenditure of billions.6 The single most significant reason the war was long and hard was the somewhat complicated and interconnected set of loyalties shared among nations. For instance France and Austria Germany would not stop fighting no matter the losses. They had the assurance that their respective allies would come to their aid so it was their responsibility to hold out as long as possible. Problem here is that their allies in Russia and Germany would have to focus on each other to win military, but they would suffer politically in not coming to the aid of their allies. This all summed up to a long and bloody war that nobody seemed to have planned for.7
I believe it can be argued that most of the nation’s involved in the initial start of the war (the Triple Entente, and the Triple alliance) had leaders that looked at the war as a means to avoid social issues at home with their citizens, and unite their people against a common foe against a ruling class that maybe didn’t represent their needs well. There is no doubt that each nation in 1914 had fears leading to individual actions in which helped to bring about the Great War. The most significant player in all of this was Germany. The German Empire manipulated Austria into an aggressive war in convincing them they were in the right and had Germany’s full support. This manipulation was in essence Germany fighting a preventative war. They believed they were pre-empting Russia and protecting their nation from the growing power the Russians represented. The assassination in Sarajevo was the opportunity Germany had been looking for, the spark to play out their plan to war which had been decide in 1912, but put off so to rally the Volk to the cause. Germany hoped to make the war look to be Russia’s fault. They pushed the Austrian’s to attack Serbia by feeding into their desire for retribution. The assassination in Sarajevo was the perfect catalyst. Germany knew Russia would come to the aid of Serbia. This would give the Empire the war against Russia and France they wanted. France was weak and Russia needed to be attacked before they became too strong militarily. In formulating this plan Chancellor Hollweg needed to make Germany’s response look to be defensive against Russian mobilization. This would ensure the support of all the German citizens and give Germany its chance to neuter Russian now before they were the dominate force in the region. Germany didn’t plan on Britain entering the war, but Britain wasn’t going to let France fall. This was when it became a continental war, and thus the Great War had begun..

1. Herwig, Holger. The Outbreak Of World War I: Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997. p53

2. Herwig, Holger. The Outbreak Of World War I: Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997. P55

3. Herwig, Holger. The Outbreak Of World War I: Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997. P127

4. Herwig, Holger. The Outbreak Of World War I: Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997. P92

5. Herwig, Holger. The Outbreak Of World War I: Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997. P100

6. Herwig, Holger. The Outbreak Of World War I: Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997. P36

7. Herwig, Holger. The Outbreak Of World War I: Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997. P41

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Unit 4 "The Great War"

    • 2432 Words
    • 11 Pages

    M _ilitarism -building up a nation’s armed forces in preparation for war. Endless planning makes war more likely.…

    • 2432 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay 2 Rough Draft

    • 1077 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Throughout the causes and events leading up to World War 1, many have made conclusions or question the statement, “was WWI inevitable?” In my perspective, I believed that it was inevitable due to the fact that I truly think people wanted to come up with an claim or an excuse as to why we needed a war and there claim was assassinating Archduke. Murdering him was the very first reason as why the war started in first place. The six European power: France, Germany ,Britain, Russia, Austria and Italy all had imperialistic, territorial and economical rivalries that were intensifying among themselves. Imperialism was also a factor in World War 1 .The countries were trying to increase their power by having territories under their control. This was becoming a problem even within the territories they were trying to rule because it was like a big bully coming along telling you what to do. It was like a competition that was getting more competitive. The point of no return I think was when Russia refused to…

    • 1077 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Wars are large and complicated affairs. The first word war was the product of many, many things. Although the war officially began on July 28th, 1914, it had been building up for a while. The beginning of the war was much like a domino affect. It started when Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia. On July 29, Russia ordered a mobilization only against Austria-Hungary in support of Serbia. The Germans threatened war on July 31 if the Russians did not demobilize. France then mobilized. On August 1, Germany declared war on Russia, and two days later, on France. The German invasion of Belgium to attack France, which violated Belgium's official neutrality, prompted Britain to declare war on Germany. World War I had begun. Nationalism, militarism, and imperialism all prompted the rivalry between nations which led to WWI.…

    • 1251 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    WW1 DBQ

    • 354 Words
    • 1 Page

    kindling Europe’s rivalry until the outbreak of World War I. Militarism refers to the “ …

    • 354 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Possibly the single most pondered question in history could be what caused the unrestricted and blind slaughter of World War I? After the Age of Imperialism reached its height during the mid-1800s it was followed by a seemingly vibrant age of progression that gleamed optimism in the minds of some Europeans. Unification among Germany in 1871 and Serbia in 1882 presented the map of Europe with new political entities. However, this age of apparent progressive reform shrouded over the real tensions that lied beneath. Unlike World War II, a phenomenon whereby a single belligerent foe antagonized the global stage to militarily intervene. It didn't possess the moral and credible vindication to resist a tyrant. Rather a delicate but toxic balance of…

    • 1196 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When we people feel frightened, it is often that the fright itself is the point when conflict is build. It is not wrong if we say that conflict is not only triggered by fear. There are many things that could cause a conflict, but when you think a bit further, these things are caused none other but by fear. Hatred of one person to the other is generally caused by fear that also brings up anger and envy. Fears of the uncertain future and death also provoke conflict. When people is scared of what others might do to them, they will make the first move and strike without realizing or trying to understand them first which caused a misunderstanding that will again root to conflict. A Moslem, sometimes has a false interpretation when trying to understand their religion. They were trying to fulfill their belief needs, and yet their fear of the American society leads them to terrorize U.S and so started the war between them. The same thing could be applied to the protest against the authority.…

    • 732 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In 1914 the world began to experience a war like no other. The Great War was the first occurrence of total war in the modern period. Total war is when a country becomes entirely involved in the war effort, economically, socially and politically. The governments and civilians of the time were faced with the problems of industrial warfare. It was a period of radical and often painful adaption for military and civilians. Prior to The Great War, nations had rather small armies and involved men fighting on distant battlefields, resulting in the men returning home triumphant or defeated. This contrasted with the modern war that nations were facing in 1914. The new aim was to merge countries’ resources, supplying all effort to the mass of conscripted solders battling on the fronts. Immense impact on the home front during The Great War consisted of increased government regulation, changes in the economy, recruitment and conscription, propaganda, censorship, politics, the revolution of women and changed attitudes towards the war.…

    • 4274 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Conflict is a word used to describe a state of discomfort, anger, frustration, sadness or pain that arises from a struggle to resist or overcome a condition of opposition, antagonism or discord. Fear is an unpleasant and frequently strong emotion caused by anticipation or awareness of danger. Fear affects the way that people manage antagonistic circumstances, and can often provoke uncharacteristic or defensive responses. In order to understand conflict, we must first accept the inevitability of conflict in everyday life, understand that conflict appears in a variety of forms and guises and how conflict is a set of dynamics and is rarely one-dimensional, stemming from manifold human fears. The Size of the Sky, by Jenny Pausacker is a narrative that engages an excessive diversity of conflict, yet not one of these is physical. This essay will discuss why fear is often the prime instigator of conflict, in particular the fear of losing one’s identity, fear for personal safety that creates conflict and fear from false perceptions.…

    • 800 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, “Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail.” This was Germany’s philosophy after losing the war. WWI began on July 28, 1914, with the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a secret group of people who originated from Serbia. Austria’s anger sparked World War I by declaring war on Serbia. This led to a chain reaction in which countries from all over Europe declared war on each, and resulted in the creation of two alliances. Even though WWI was supposed to end by an armistice signed between France and Germany, the war raged on due to poor communication. The war formally ended when a group known as the League of Nations created a document called the Treaty of Versailles in which Germany was not represented. This document was harsh to the Germans as it blamed the entire war on them and gave them a colossal, unmanageable debt under the war guilt clause. From a current standpoint, this was a very foolish thing to do, but the question is what parts of that Treaty led to the Germans to fight back? The Treaty of Versailles helped cause WWII because the Germans were unwilling to pay the debt, they felt very insecure, they wanted to regain lost territory, and most importantly wanted the restore glory for Germany.…

    • 1128 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Never the less, we can also argue that the war in 1914 arose primarily as a result of German aggression because the war was planned in order to achieve “great power status”. It is source two that presents the theory of Fritz Fischer, in which he states that “Germany bore full responsibility for the war”. Fischer is enforcing the point that Germany was indeed aggressive and power hungry, this would suggest a suitable motive for them to go to war and therefore disagree with the opinion above. Further on, source two once again refers to the power hungry nature of Germany. “War was the only final mean by which the ruling elites could seek to maintain their power”, you could interpret this quote in two ways, you could say that this suggests the Germans were in fact trapped and they could only see one way to go on, through war. However I think that the source in fact is suggesting that they wanted to expand throughout Europe to gain a greater power status, to do this they had to go…

    • 1290 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    World war 1

    • 606 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The next cause was militarism. Document C states Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Great Britain, Russia, and France has very increased in growth in armaments from 1890 to 1914. From 1890 to 1914 the amount of British pounds spent on the army and navy from Germany and Austria-Hungary increased almost 400%. Also, Great Britain, Russia, and France spent over 200% from the same period of time. In document D Bernhard von Bulow, the German chancellor, spoke “...German people will be a hammer or an avil.” Bulow worried that England, France, and Russia…

    • 606 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Europe was in a time of peace then in 1914 changed everything. Countries were starting to grow and build up their military due to other countries doing the same. The straw to break the camel's back was the assassination of Prince Franz Ferdinand. The four years of war was fueled by the support of military power with help from nationalism. Along with military, countries united into alliances and surrounded germany and other central alliances. The Great War was a european arms race to be the biggest and the best.…

    • 482 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The World War I also known as the Great War, was a global war that started out in Europe 1914 and lasted until 1918. Around seven million civilians died and more than nine million combatants died. Among other factors, Imperialism lead up to the War, which is a policy of extending the authority of an nation over foreign countries and holding dependencies. In which empires were building militarism which was especially important of how a country was run. Also, the Industrialism which involved the ability of production of cheap goods, weapons and other helpful supplies for war and this in turn lead to increased labor. In other words, this was the aggressive preparation for war also known as Militarism.…

    • 372 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Franco­Prussian war of 1871 and the Crimean War of 1853, war began to become a…

    • 1815 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Wars do not start over night. WWI and WWII were more than 20 years, each, in the making. Countries began lining up long before they began to fight. The larger countries started gobbling up the smaller ones around them. They began to build their arsenals and inventing new war machines. People showed their love for their country, or as in the case of Nazi Germany, they were brainwashed. With all these happenings a precipitating factor was needed. In WWI it presented when the Archduke Ferdinand and his wife were assassinated in Serbia. Fascists wanting to control the world helped cause WWII. Japan was angry because Britain and the USA imposed an iron and oil embargo. They needed these raw materials to fabricate weapons. It doesn’t require much more to start a war. The final straw was Germany invading Poland. The Second World War was on.…

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays